Apple's new Siri voice control on the iPhone 4S can answer questions, access information and deliver search results without displaying any advertising, which one analysis says will hurt search providers like Google.

If users were to become more accustomed to search by voice through Siri rather than visiting Google's website and typing a query, it could place Google at risk, a new analysis from Nigam Arora suggests. Arora noted that before buying an iPhone 4S with Siri, he was required to search for an Indian restaurant through Google's website.

"Google would have made money if I clicked on any one of a number of advertisements for restaurants on the search page," he said. "Siri completely bypassed Google and went to a database called Yelp."

Arora believes that Siri could change users' mobile habits, making them search for information via Apple's Siri rather than directly through Google. He thinks Siri is a better solution because it provides a small number of relevant results rather than a long list that users must sort through. Plus, he views advertisements on a small screen like an iPhone as a distraction.

To support his hypothesis, Arora cites a small study he conducted, in which a total of 40 iPhone 4S users were queried about their mobile search habits. All 40 said they see no need to search Google if Siri can answer their question, while 27 indicated they have not done a single direct Google search since they obtained their iPhone 4S.

Of course, Siri does provide Google search results if a user asks the service to search the Web. Answers are also provided through Bing, Wolfram Alpha, Wikipedia, Yelp and Yahoo.

But because users do not need to visit or view a website to utilize Siri, companies like Google that rely heavily on advertising revenue could be stung by user adoption of Siri.

"The way most searches are done at present is merely a temporary phase that will disappear," Arora said. "The business model of Google is at risk. There will always be a need for an index search like Google performs, but the most common search activities will drift away from Google. The problem for Google is that it makes the most money from the most common searches."

As does the whole iOS app paradigm. Google is about the web not the internet per se, Apple is removing the need for the web more and more with the iOS approach. Google is doomed.

I don't see how Google can compete with Apple on this front. I see two distinct obstacles for Google. The first is the lack of direct revenue from Android that investing in a built-in intelligent personal assistant might not be cost effective. The other is the number of Android-based devices on the market. Google would need so many more dedicated servers for parsing these queries that they might have to purposely limit its intelligence to make it useable. The only comparable solution I see is for Google to offer a paid service that vendors can opt-in to include with Android, but even that has its pitfalls.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patranus

I wonder if this Apple/Yelp relationship had anything to do with Yelp stepping up its attacks against Google from scraping content.

To paraphrase: "The competitor of my competitor is my partner."

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

So what happens when websites that rely on ad revenues start blocking Siri requests?

Exactly. If google makes money on ads from searching, why would it even allow outside apps to use its searching abilities? If all the search engines blocked remote searches by dedicated apps, those apps would likely have to pay those companies to use their services.

I have to confess this I read this and laughed very loudly. Google's entire business is built upon selling advertising if Apple (and others) can begin to leverage that ad traffic away, things could get very interesting, very rapidly. For one, I'd like to see Google forced to compete in the mobile OS space on an even playing field. At the moment, Android, its strengths and weaknesses aside, is a major loss-leader for Google and serves merely to drive advertising traffic to them.

We can all do our bit to thumb our noses at Mountain View by using this site instead of Google:

"I dont believe that your phone should be an assistant. Your phone is a tool for communicating. You shouldnt be communicating with the phone; you should be communicating with somebody on the other side of the phone."
Andy Rubin

I don't see how Google can compete with Apple on this front. I see two distinct obstacles for Google. The first is the lack of direct revenue from Android that investing in a built-in intelligent personal assistant might not be cost effective. The other is the number of Android-based devices on the market. Google would need so many more dedicated servers for parsing these queries that they might have to purposely limit its intelligence to make it useable. The only comparable solution I see is for Google to offer a paid service that vendors can opt-in to include with Android, but even that has its pitfalls.

Google makes money if you click on an ad, not just by using Google to search. What an FUD article.

Not true. Many of Google's ad programs charge you so much per view as well as so much per click-through.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Exactly. If google makes money on ads from searching, why would it even allow outside apps to use its searching abilities? If all the search engines blocked remote searches by dedicated apps, those apps would likely have to pay those companies to use their services.

Who says Apple isn't paying them?

If they aren't, I'm sure Google will try. Look at what they're doing with Google Maps. If you access it more than 25,000 times per day, you pay. I suspect Google will try something similar with search.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

"I dont believe that your phone should be an assistant. Your phone is a tool for communicating. You shouldnt be communicating with the phone; you should be communicating with somebody on the other side of the phone."
Andy Rubin

So when I use my phone for doing Google searches in its web browser Rubin has a problem with that? I think Rubin has some sour grapes over Siri.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

If they aren't, I'm sure Google will try. Look at what they're doing with Google Maps. If you access it more than 25,000 times per day, you pay. I suspect Google will try something similar with search.

That would be reasonable though. I have no problems with Google doing that.

I have to confess this I read this and laughed very loudly. Google's entire business is built upon selling advertising — if Apple (and others) can begin to leverage that ad traffic away, things could get very interesting, very rapidly. For one, I'd like to see Google forced to compete in the mobile OS space on an even playing field. At the moment, Android, its strengths and weaknesses aside, is a major loss-leader for Google and serves merely to drive advertising traffic to them.

We can all do our bit to thumb our noses at Mountain View by using this site instead of Google:

I haven't seen an ad on the Internet for many years and I switched Safari (and other browsers) to Yahoo! a couple of years ago.

Interestingly, this is not Apple or Steve Jobs "Go(ing) Thermouclear War" on Google. Siri would have done far more damage to Google if Apple had not made significant changes to Siri. I am actually puzzled by some of the changes Apple made to Siri although I very much enjoy what Siri does today (most of which it didn't do previously).

Here is a list of what Siri could previously do and would have, in my estimation, have done significantly more damage to Google:

OpenTable, Gayot, CitySearch, BooRah, Yelp, Yahoo Local, ReserveTravel, Localeze for restaurant and business questions and actions:
"I am looking for a quiet, romantic Italian restaurant. Reserve a table for me on Tuesday at 7 p.m."
Siri would previously "read" Yelp reviews for comments about "quiet" and "romantic" and display the results with user reviews and direct links to Yelp. Now, I must click on the small icon at the bottom to view Yelp results and I can't reserve a table. Siri used OpenTable to actually make the reservation (using SMS) for you.

Eventful, StubHub, and LiveKick for events and concert information:
"What is going on this weekend?"
Siri provided a list of activities across a range of interests. This was an extremely nice feature.

MovieTickets, RottenTomatoes and the New York Times for movie information and reviews
"Any good movies out right now? I would like tickets to xxx, Friday at 9 p.m."
Siri had movie information and you could order tickets. I hope Apple will integrate their iTunes Movie Trailers (which is an outstanding App) with Siri as soon as possible.

TaxiMagic for transportation:
"I need a taxi at my current location as soon as possible."
Siri would previously request a taxi for you via SMS.

If Apple integrates similar services and provides their own mapping and navigation next year, I can envision the death of Google Android.

Samsung is the only Android handset manufacturer who is making significant profits (~29% of profits versus Apple's ~52%). Together, Apple and Samsung are capturing ~80% of the profits with HTC in third place at ~9%. Google itself is losing money on Android due to the purchase of Motorola Mobile Inc. I can't understand how this is a sustainable model especially when Google has stated that the lion's share of their mobile advertising profits are generated from Apple iPhone.

So when I use my phone for doing Google searches in its web browser Rubin has a problem with that? I think Rubin has some sour grapes over Siri.

No kidding. I am surprised at his very limited view of a smart phone. But I think it is safe to presume he is working the new Android voice reckognition technology as we speak. Its gonna be called er Rubin.

If Apple integrates similar services and provides their own mapping and navigation next year, I can envision the death of Google Android.

It does sound like Jobs kept his promise in destroying Android, but is doing it through a really clever attack at Google's core profit center in a way that will make it hard for Google and vendors to justify the use of Android OS.

Quote:

Samsung is the only Android handset manufacturer who is making significant profits (~29% of profits versus Apple's ~52%). Together, Apple and Samsung are capturing ~80% of the profits with HTC in third place at ~9%.

I was hopin someone would run the numbers. That 90% from just two companies. That seems pretty extreme.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

ai is really scraping the bottom of the barrel to drum up page views and earn it's advertising revenue

"If users were to become more accustomed to search by voice through Siri rather than visiting Google's website and typing a query, it could place Google at risk, a new analysis from Nigam Arora suggests. Arora noted that before buying an iPhone 4S with Siri, he was required to search for an Indian restaurant through Google's website.

required? as if there's no other search engine, what a fool

"Google would have made money if I clicked on any one of a number of advertisements for restaurants on the search page," he said. "Siri completely bypassed Google and went to a database called Yelp.""

that'll be yelp, the well known search engine that's been there for years, ad funded, just like google, it seems the fool doesn't realise this

if this fool were correct, then iphone threatens all ad funded search engines, which is probably most of them

that's not a good thing, the web is useful because of the free exchange of information via open standards, the general public benefits from that, and the companies that enable it have a perfect right to find ways to make a decent living on the back of providing the service

were apple, or any other compay, to manage to sufficiently balkanize the internet and in so doing break the ad funded business model, then what will replace it? shall we all pay per query? or simply lose open access to the information?

People are trying way too hard to paint Siri as an attempt to destroy Google. First of all, a lot of things you use Siri for, has nothing to do with a google search (appointments, etc). Second, if you want to search for something, like e.g. a resturant, you'd use yelp app anyway even if you don't use Siri, so it's not really a loss for Google, because Google search isn't really an alternative to using Siri in this case. If you want to know something, likewise you'd go to wiki yourself, best case scenario you search wiki in google, big deal, it's not like you'd click on an Ad when you try to go to wiki after Google search.

Exactly. If google makes money on ads from searching, why would it even allow outside apps to use its searching abilities? If all the search engines blocked remote searches by dedicated apps, those apps would likely have to pay those companies to use their services.

Who says Apple isn't paying them?

If you read the article, Siri does not use Google for straightforward queries. When it does use Google (when you ask to go to the web), a google page appears on your phone. At that pont Google's regular fees will apply.

The point is that Siri uses a non-Google database to answer many questions. The question about Yelp and how Siri uses it and whether it pays or doesn't pay is an interesting one.

They already have voice actions on android; though no where as polished, integrated (could say that about quite a few google products ), or interactive as siri. Will google expand on voice actions to match siri? I don't know for sure, but with all the hype around siri right now, i wouldn't be surprised if they do.

What I find interesting is that on Google web app for iOS, when you type in a query the ads are at the bottom of page one but the subsequent pages they are at the top. Same with Google App using a voice search, which I presume takes you to the exact same web results for iOS devices.

I haven't seen an ad on the Internet for many years and I switched Safari (and other browsers) to Yahoo! a couple of years ago.

Interestingly, this is not Apple or Steve Jobs "Go(ing) Thermouclear War" on Google. Siri would have done far more damage to Google if Apple had not made significant changes to Siri. I am actually puzzled by some of the changes Apple made to Siri although I very much enjoy what Siri does today (most of which it didn't do previously).

Here is a list of what Siri could previously do and would have, in my estimation, have done significantly more damage to Google:

OpenTable, Gayot, CitySearch, BooRah, Yelp, Yahoo Local, ReserveTravel, Localeze for restaurant and business questions and actions:
"I am looking for a quiet, romantic Italian restaurant. Reserve a table for me on Tuesday at 7 p.m."
Siri would previously "read" Yelp reviews for comments about "quiet" and "romantic" and display the results with user reviews and direct links to Yelp. Now, I must click on the small icon at the bottom to view Yelp results and I can't reserve a table. Siri used OpenTable to actually make the reservation (using SMS) for you.

Eventful, StubHub, and LiveKick for events and concert information:
"What is going on this weekend?"
Siri provided a list of activities across a range of interests. This was an extremely nice feature.

MovieTickets, RottenTomatoes and the New York Times for movie information and reviews
"Any good movies out right now? I would like tickets to xxx, Friday at 9 p.m."
Siri had movie information and you could order tickets. I hope Apple will integrate their iTunes Movie Trailers (which is an outstanding App) with Siri as soon as possible.

TaxiMagic for transportation:
"I need a taxi at my current location as soon as possible."
Siri would previously request a taxi for you via SMS.

If Apple integrates similar services and provides their own mapping and navigation next year, I can envision the death of Google Android.

Samsung is the only Android handset manufacturer who is making significant profits (~29% of profits versus Apple's ~52%). Together, Apple and Samsung are capturing ~80% of the profits with HTC in third place at ~9%. Google itself is losing money on Android due to the purchase of Motorola Mobile Inc. I can't understand how this is a sustainable model especially when Google has stated that the lion's share of their mobile advertising profits are generated from Apple iPhone.

I think that the Siri beta emphasis is to integrate it with iOS and to do a few things well -- as opposed to doing a lot of things.

I suspect those things you mention will be added to Siri over time.

The question about the Google, Bing, Yahoo search engines is how do they support themselves when services like Amazon Silk and Siri bypass them or repurpose their results.

If those who want to advertise their products and services cannot do so through searches, ads and click-throughs -- how do they reach their target audience?

I don't pretend to know the answer -- maybe a new web advertising service paradigm:

"Siri show me all the ads for.... "

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

Don't forget that google already has a framework for something like this in place. They have voice search, a huge database of voice samples from google 411 and some IP regarding voice recognition.

They already have voice actions on android; though no where as polished, integrated (could say that about quite a few google products ), or interactive as siri. Will google expand on voice actions to match siri? I don't know for sure, but with all the hype around siri right now, i wouldn't be surprised if they do.

That's the point I was trying to make. I don't think Google can expand Android's voice actions to be as intelligent or as encompassing as Siri without some major growth issues. If they do, they might charge vendors for the service, like they already do for some apps on Android, and will probably release it as a future version of the OS, like with a couple of devices that will come out v5.0 (any idea what they'll calling it?).

Apple is simply more flexible than Google is for this service. It's not unlike how Apple can switch up their Macs so easily and MS is left having to support legacy HW and code. I use MS as an example because Windows is a very successful and very profitable OS.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

People are trying way too hard to paint Siri as an attempt to destroy Google. First of all, a lot of things you use Siri for, has nothing to do with a google search (appointments, etc). Second, if you want to search for something, like e.g. a resturant, you'd use yelp app anyway even if you don't use Siri, so it's not really a loss for Google, because Google search isn't really an alternative to using Siri in this case. If you want to know something, likewise you'd go to wiki yourself, best case scenario you search wiki in google, big deal, it's not like you'd click on an Ad when you try to go to wiki after Google search.

I can't recall the last time I clicked on a Google search ad. Maybe years ago and then only 1 or 2 times. Some people do trust those ads though since they are some sort of a validation that clicking it will take you to a legitimate website and not some scam.

No kidding. I am surprised at his very limited view of a smart phone. But I think it is safe to presume he is working the new Android voice reckognition technology as we speak. Its gonna be called er Rubin.

I suggest the names...

For Android:

AndyAndy

RumpleBumkin

... either wil do

For Windows 8:

AndyAndy

Ballmer

... either wil do

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

Which is why I marvel that Google makes any money at all. Who the heck clicks on that BS?

People with money who want to buy stuff. Also Google knows exactly who they are since they are tracking them. I know it seems odd but Google sends me a check every month for my AdSense account. The trick I found on my bait webpages is to write an intro to a topic and then place the ads. If people are interested in the topic they usually want to click on something to continue. Works for me.

I can't recall the last time I clicked on a Google search ad. Maybe years ago and then only 1 or 2 times. Some people do trust those ads though since they are some sort of a validation that clicking it will take you to a legitimate website and not some scam.

Actually it's the other way around. People trust natural search over ppc. Anyone in SEO will tell you that.

As does the whole iOS app paradigm. Google is about the web not the internet per se, Apple is removing the need for the web more and more with the iOS approach. Google is doomed.

Strong words, but not hyperbole. I remember when Yahoo and Inktomi were the kings of search, and supposedly irreplaceable. Now they are footnotes in the fast-moving history of the Intertubes. Incredibly, Apple has managed to circumvent some, if not all, need for search. They built a better mousetrap.

That's the point I was trying to make. I don't think Google can expand Android's voice actions to be as intelligent or as encompassing as Siri without some major growth issues. If they do, they might charge vendors for the service, like they already do for some apps on Android, and will probably release it as a future version of the OS, like with a couple of devices that will come out v5.0 (any idea what they'll calling it?).

Apple is simply more flexible than Google is for this service. It's not unlike how Apple can switch up their Macs so easily and MS is left having to support legacy HW and code. I use MS as an example because Windows is a very successful and very profitable OS.

It does sound like Jobs kept his promise in destroying Android, but is doing it through a really clever attack at Google's core profit center in a way that will make it hard for Google and vendors to justify the use of Android OS.

Quote:

Samsung is the only Android handset manufacturer who is making significant profits (~29% of profits versus Apple's ~52%). Together, Apple and Samsung are capturing ~80% of the profits with HTC in third place at ~9%.

I was hopin someone would run the numbers. That 90% from just two companies. That seems pretty extreme.

There you go again.... it is either:

eighty-one percent from two companies

or

ninety percent from three companies

I do hope your 4S arrives soon -- Siri can help you with your math [homework]

I do agree that it is really clever how Google is now endangered by Siri (with help from SJ)...

...and lets give credit where credit is due -- the clever by one half persons: Rubin, Schmidt, Page.

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

Strong words, but not hyperbole. I remember when Yahoo and Inktomi were the kings of search, and supposedly irreplaceable. Now they are footnotes in the fast-moving history of the Intertubes. Incredibly, Apple has managed to circumvent some, if not all, need for search. They built a better mousetrap.

Yes, Google makes money on advertising--and Apple doesn't provide any sort of search functionality at all. It wouldn't surprise me if Siri does use Google services, paying Google on the side for said results.

Even if Siri isn't using Google technology, then Apple is paying another (Bing?) for said services.